Attention!!! Pro Sports Daily will be down on Wednesday morning from 5:00am - 7:00am eastern time for database maintenance. All Sports Direct Inc. properties will be down during this scheduled outage.
Sorry for any inconvenience that this outage may cause.

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Troy Aikman: Hall of Fame Worthy?

This has always been something that has bugged me a little bit. I have nothing against Troy Aikman, but is he really a Hall of Fame worthy candidate? I am not trying to troll or bait or anything, I think this is a debateable topic.

Let's look at what's concrete first, the stats:

Troy was the QB of one of the most prolific franchises in pro sports. Here were his stats:

-He threw at least 20 TD's in a season ONCE (23; 1992)...totaling 165 TD's in 154 games, barely more than 1/game.

-141 Interceptions during this time span, meaning, he almost threw 1 pick for every TD

-Career completion percentage of 61.5%

-Career QB rating of 81.6...surpassing 90 for a season just twice

-Troy never had a 4000 yard season, in fact, never had a 3500 yard season. He had 5 seasons over 3000 yards

-He averaged 30 attempts throwing per game, meaning he was throwing at a decent rate, but not putting up big stats.

Now, look at who he played with.

-He had arguably the best offensive line of All-Time in front of him for a good chunk of his career. This is a huge advantage for a pocket passer like Troy.

-Emmitt Smith was his RB, which takes a huge load of pressure of Troy, yet he failed to become more than just average statistically, even with defenses focusing on Emmitt.

-Had Michael Irvin and Alvin Harper...Michael being one of the more underrated WR's of all-time, yet is still a HOFer.

Troy did win three Super Bowls, but if you look at the facts, it didn't appear to be because Troy was a Hall of Fame QB. Troy WAS a good QB, but is he great enough to be in the Hall of Fame?

Also, some of you will mention that the way the game was played at that time was very different from today. Yes, I know. However, by NFL standards even at that time, he still wasn't that prolific. Kelly, Marino, Elway, Young, and Favre all managed to put up much better numbers than Aikman did, despite being on worse teams many times. Certainly none were as complete as the Cowboys were much of the time.

So, is Aikman's 3 Super Bowl victories enough to be Hall of Fame worthy? Or, is he one of the more overrated QB's of all-time?

I don't think there is much doubt about him being a hall of famer and this from an Eagles fan.

I hate him announcing games but he was a heck of special player.

I'm not saying he shouldn't be in the Hall of Fame, I just want to know why he is. I'd love to hear more than "he is a special player" because I think of the best of the best when it comes to being "special" as an NFL athlete.

One, it's a different era, so numbers were harder to come by in the '90s.

Two, he would have had better stats if Emmit Smith wasn't his running back. Why throw when you have one of the best running backs and offensive lines in NFL history? When he had to throw he could and often times was successful. There are many QBs who had great talent and didn't win, Troy did win and getting 3 out of 4 is impressive, even in the non-salary cap era that Dallas thrived in.

Three, he's the QB, and the QB gets more credit or blame than anyone on the team. That's just the way it is and he's the face of the '90s Cowboys, though Emmit, Michael and Deion were far superior athletes and talents.

One, it's a different era, so numbers were harder to come by in the '90s.

Two, he would have had better stats if Emmit Smith wasn't his running back. Why throw when you have one of the best running backs and offensive lines in NFL history? When he had to throw he could and often times was successful. There are many QBs who had great talent and didn't win, Troy did win and getting 3 out of 4 is impressive, even in the non-salary cap era that Dallas thrived in.

Three, he's the QB, and the QB gets more credit or blame than anyone on the team. That's just the way it is and he's the face of the '90s Cowboys, though Emmit, Michael and Deion were far superior athletes and talents.

You obviously didn't read what I wrote.

About "One": I already mentioned this, and his stats were still only average for his era. If he's average statitiscally, even though he's on the best team, does that make him a Hall of Famer? A player can be a great player, but Hall of Fame is reserved is for the elite.

About "Two": I already brought this up as well. He had Emmitt Smith, but still threw 30 times a game. When you throw 30 times a game, you should have better numbers than what Aikman had. Defenses were focusing on Emmitt, which should open up the passing game. He had the Irvin, Harper, Novacek, and even Emmitt was a good receiver out of the backfield.

About "Three": This is the only thing that you could put on Aikman's Hall of Fame resume. In my opinion, it isn't enough. Alex Smith's play this year would be good enough to do what Aikman did...is Alex Smith a Hall of Famer? No. Because he doesn't play on Super Bowl winners.

Trust me I've had the same thoughts about Troy myself, and back in his day always thought he was overrated (have since changed my mind quite a bit). And he did qb behind the best offensive line in football, had maybe the best TE and FB in the league, had an incredible receiving core and of course one of the best running backs of all time. That being said, he without a doubt is a hall of famer. He didn't have to throw. He made the throws that he had to. He was a winner. And I think he would have had better numbers if forced to, but he was never forced to. And obviously he played in a different age.

About "One": I already mentioned this, and his stats were still only average for his era. If he's average statitiscally, even though he's on the best team, does that make him a Hall of Famer? A player can be a great player, but Hall of Fame is reserved is for the elite.

About "Two": I already brought this up as well. He had Emmitt Smith, but still threw 30 times a game. When you throw 30 times a game, you should have better numbers than what Aikman had. Defenses were focusing on Emmitt, which should open up the passing game. He had the Irvin, Harper, Novacek, and even Emmitt was a good receiver out of the backfield.

About "Three": This is the only thing that you could put on Aikman's Hall of Fame resume. In my opinion, it isn't enough. Alex Smith's play this year would be good enough to do what Aikman did...is Alex Smith a Hall of Famer? No. Because he doesn't play on Super Bowl winners.

the end of number 3, well then Brett Farve should be on the buble because he only won 1 SB. Jim Kelly should not be in, because he never won....

About "One": I already mentioned this, and his stats were still only average for his era. If he's average statitiscally, even though he's on the best team, does that make him a Hall of Famer? A player can be a great player, but Hall of Fame is reserved is for the elite.

About "Two": I already brought this up as well. He had Emmitt Smith, but still threw 30 times a game. When you throw 30 times a game, you should have better numbers than what Aikman had. Defenses were focusing on Emmitt, which should open up the passing game. He had the Irvin, Harper, Novacek, and even Emmitt was a good receiver out of the backfield.

About "Three": This is the only thing that you could put on Aikman's Hall of Fame resume. In my opinion, it isn't enough. Alex Smith's play this year would be good enough to do what Aikman did...is Alex Smith a Hall of Famer? No. Because he doesn't play on Super Bowl winners.

Your logic is flawed. Marino is a Hall of Famer and he didn't play on a Super Bowl winning team.

About "One": I already mentioned this, and his stats were still only average for his era. If he's average statitiscally, even though he's on the best team, does that make him a Hall of Famer? A player can be a great player, but Hall of Fame is reserved is for the elite.

About "Two": I already brought this up as well. He had Emmitt Smith, but still threw 30 times a game. When you throw 30 times a game, you should have better numbers than what Aikman had. Defenses were focusing on Emmitt, which should open up the passing game. He had the Irvin, Harper, Novacek, and even Emmitt was a good receiver out of the backfield.

About "Three": This is the only thing that you could put on Aikman's Hall of Fame resume. In my opinion, it isn't enough. Alex Smith's play this year would be good enough to do what Aikman did...is Alex Smith a Hall of Famer? No. Because he doesn't play on Super Bowl winners.

LOL, well your original post was kind of long... I apologize.

If he didn't win any Super Bowls, he probably wouldn't be in because statistically his career wasn't impressive. I just seem to remember in every clutch situation when they needed a pass, he seemed to come through, especially in the playoffs. Was he overrated? Maybe.

In his prime, he was a top 3 QB in the NFC and won 3 SB. I've heard similar arguments with Terry Bradshaw, no doubt he was on some pretty darn good teams and his stats weren't eye-popping, but championships seem to take priority.

And again, the QB gets the glory... It's like Al Pacino says in Any Given Sunday: "You're not a flash in the pan receiver, or corner... You're the *%&$ Quarterback!"